The+Cold+War+Game

=The Cold War Game= Jay Robnett (tjrobnett@gmail.com) Nate Aldworth (natealdworth1401@gmail.com) Mundo Cronk (mdvs17@gmail.com) Jason Barclay (jasonbarclay@gmail.com) Kelley Hundley (kelleyhundley@gmail.com)



Instructional Objectives
What will the learners learn from this game (or more likely, what learning objectives are being reinforced by this game)? If it's for school use, where does it fit into the curriculum? (You can find links to curricular frameworks [|here] ). National Standards - World History NSS-WH.5-12.9 ERA 9: THE 20TH CENTURY SINCE 1945: PROMISES AND PARADOXES -Understands how post-World War II reconstruction occurred, new international power relations took shape, and colonial empires broke up. National Standards - US History NSS-USH.5-12.9 ERA 9: POSTWAR UNITED STATES (1945 TO EARLY 1970s) -Understands how the Cold War and conflicts in Korea and Vietnam influenced domestic and international politics.

California State Standards
11.9.2 Understand the role of military alliances, including NATO and SEATO, in deterring communist aggression and maintaining security during the cold war. 11.9.3 Trace the origins and geopolitical consequences (foreign and domestic) of the cold war and containment policy, including the following: The era of McCarthy, instances of domestic communism (e.g., Alger Hiss) and blacklisting; The Truman Doctrine; The Berlin Blockade; The Korean War; The Bay of Pigs Invasion and The Cuban Missile Crisis; Atomic testing in the American West, "Mutual Assured Destruction" doctrine, disarmament policies; The Vietnam War; Latin American Policies. 11.9.4 List the effects of foreign policies on domestic policy and vice versa (e.g. protests during the war in Vietnam; the "Nuclear Freeze" movement) 11.9.5 Analyze the role of the Reagan Administration and other factors in the victory of the West in the Cold War.
 * ~ 10.9 ||~ Students analyze the international developments in the post-World War II world. ||
 * 10.9.1 || Compare the economic and military power shifts caused by the war, including the Yalta Pact, the development of nuclear weapons, Soviet control over Eastern European nations, and the economic recoveries of Germany and Japan. ||
 * 10.9.2 || Analyze the causes of the Cold War, with the free world on one side and Soviet client states on the other, including competition for influence in such places as Egypt, the Congo, Vietnam, and Chile. ||
 * 10.9.3 || Understand the importance of the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, which established the pattern for America's postwar policy of supplying economic and military aid to prevent the spread of Communism and the resulting economic and political competition in arenas such as Southeast Asia (i.e., the Korean War, Vietnam War), Cuba, and Africa. ||
 * 10.9.4 || Analyze the Chinese Civil War, the rise of Mao Tse-tung, and the subsequent political and economic upheavals in China (e.g., the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, and the Tiananmen Square uprising). ||
 * 10.9.5 || Describe the uprisings in Poland (1952), Hungary (1956), and Czechoslovakia (1968) and those countries' resurgence in the 1970s and 1980s as people in Soviet satellites sought freedom from Soviet control. ||
 * 10.9.6 || Understand how the forces of nationalism developed in the Middle East, how the Holocaust affected world opinion regarding the need for a Jewish state, and the significance and effects of the location and establishment of Israel on world affairs. ||
 * 10.9.7 || Analyze the reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union, including the weakness of the command economy, burdens of military commitments, and growing resistance to Soviet rule by dissidents in satellite states and the non-Russian Soviet republics. ||
 * 10.9.8 || Discuss the establishment and work of the United Nations and the purposes and functions of the Warsaw Pact, SEATO, NATO, and the Organization of American States. ||
 * 11.9 Students analyze U.S. Foreign Policy Since World War Two**

Another game that is much closer to ours is **Cold War - CIA vs KGB** published by Fantasy Light Games (2008). This is a two person board game where each player runs a spy network that seeks to influence other countries to align with their side. However, this game is in more of a deep strategy, Diplomacy style game that relies more on power and tactics rather than knowledge of Cold War events to determine the winner.
 * Competing Products**
 * Cold War** - a video game for the PC by Mindware Studios came out in 2005. This is a FPS single player game that relies on stealth and invention. It is said to be similar to the popular Splinter Cell game. Obviously as a video game that is in first person, this game is very different from the competitive two person game we have envisioned.
 * Twilight Struggle** by GMT games is the game that seems closest to the game we have proposed. This is a board game where two players each take a side in the cold war and play cards to influence countries. The scoring is based on a scale of -20 to +20 (-20 USSR complete victory, +20 USA). This game is different in that it take a long, long time to play (4-8 hours) and also is light on teaching of real events.

**Object of the Game**
Players will compete to dominate the world. One team will represent the West (U.S. and its allies) the other team will represent the East (USSR and the Warsaw Pact). The goal of the West is to take away bricks and "Tear down the wall." The goal of the East is to add bricks to the Wall to keep their economic way of life isolated and secure.
 * Through the role of the dice, players will be randomly given cold war fact-based questions, more challenging and thought provoking "scenario" questions or random "wildcard" events.
 * If a fact based question is answered correctly, the U.S. player takes a brick from the wall, while the Soviet player would add a brick to the wall.
 * Scenarios have no "right" or "wrong" answers. The player must select an answer from a list, the answers are each rated with the number of bricks to be removed/added to the wall.
 * Wildcards are random historical events that may help or hinder the side that draws one. There is no question to answer, the card will dictate the number of bricks to be added or removed from the wall.
 * The wall will start will 20 bricks at the beginning of the game. The West wins if the bricks are all taken, the East wins if the wall totals 40 bricks.

Content Analysis
 ||  ||  ||
 * ===Content Type=== || ===Content Elements=== || ===Game Elements=== ||
 * ===**Facts**=== || Students must know basic facts about the cold war based on the CA Standards. || * "Fact Questions" - each asked a knowledge question.
 * Team that answers correctly wins power/influence points. ||
 * ===**Concepts**=== || Threat of communist spread, nuclear threats, space race, end of communism || * red game pieces=communists (USSR)
 * blue game pieces=capitalists (USA)
 * ===**Principles**=== || The Berlin Wall separates West and East Berlin. This served as a metaphor for the struggle between Democratic capitalism and totalitarian communism. As the two sides competed with each other, they struggled to "win" influence over nonaligned countries by propaganda, coup de etats, funding revolutionaries, etc. || * wall built up to keep communism in communist countrie s.
 * this will be a function of the number of "fact questions" answered correctly by a team and how well they have chosen the best choices on the "scenario questions"
 * wall torn down to tear communism down and let democracy spread
 * see above.
 * ===**Procedures**=== ||  || * take turns to roll dice. The die roll determines which type of action is taken: Fact question; Scenario; or Wild card situation.
 * Players will consult a pamphlet to find the given question, or scenario.
 * ===**Processes**=== || There are three different types of questions:


 * Fact based questions that are knowledge oriented.
 * Scenarios that test higher level thinking skills.
 * Random events that can help or hurt either side. || The three situations are exemplified by the three types of cards a team may draw from each turn:


 * Fact Questions: knowledge based question that results in bricks added/removed from the wall.
 * Scenarios: Various situations are presented that reflect real events of the cold war but that may end in an "alternative history" such as Castro defeated by Batista in Cuba. Players will have the chance to earn/subtract multiple bricks based on their responses to geostrategic questions based on the scenario.
 * Wild card situation: Random events that give or take away bricks. ||
 * ===**Probabilities**=== || Fact type questions are twice as likely as the scenarios. Random events (wild cards) are least likely. || * Six sided die will be used.
 * Roll of 1,2 or 3 for Fact Question
 * Roll of 4 or 5 for Scenario
 * Roll of 6 for Wild card situation. ||
 * ===**Context**=== || Events occurred between end of WWII and 1991. || * Players will move there tokens to each location of the fact, scenario or wild card. ||
 * ===**Vantage Points**=== || Point of view of capitalists, communists || * Players will sit around game board opposite teammate. ||
 * ===**Vantage Points**=== || Point of view of capitalists, communists || * Players will sit around game board opposite teammate. ||

Game Materials
Game Board: Map of the world includes:
 * Major countries with major capitals illustrated
 * Blowup of Europe with space for Wall dividing west and east.
 * Cards that refer the player to one of three types of question/information:
 * Fact Question
 * Scenarios
 * Wild card situation
 * Game tokens: blue for West; red for East. Blue and red markers to designate countries controlled
 * Wall bricks: 40 bricks
 * US Pamphlet of Fact questions and USSR answer key
 * USSR Pamphlet of Fact questions and US answer key
 * Scenario Pamphlet
 * Wild card Pamphlet

Time Required
Game should take five minutes to set up and 45 minutes to play. The goal is to have a game playable in one class period.

The Rules

 * Set up:**
 * Each team places their marker on their capital (Washington DC for West; Moscow for East).
 * The Wall is built as a 20 brick structure that divides East and West Europe.
 * Each team finds its appropriate pamphlet (Blue cover: USA, Red cover: USSR). The Scenio and Wildcard pamphlets are left out accessible to each player.
 * The Cards are shuffled and placed on the board in the marked area.

1. Teams roll to see who goes first.


 * The Turn:**
 * Team A rolls the di and picks a card. For a roll of 1, 2 or 3 the player will refer to the "Fact" question; a roll of 4 or 5 will refer to a Scenario; a roll of 6 will refer to a "Wild card".
 * The card will refer the player to a numbered Fact, Scenario or Wildcard. (see Diagram #1)
 * The opponent will look in the appropriate pamphlet at the number given on the card first telling the player where to mover his pawn on the map.
 * If the question is a Fact or Scenario, the opponent asks the Player A the question that is indicated by the card. After Player A answers, the result is detemined from the key and the appropriate number of bricks are added or removed from the wall.
 * If a Wildcard was rolled (a six) the Player A can refer to the correct number, read the situation and add or remove the appropriate number of bricks to the wall.
 * Turn ends and opponent begins his/her turn.
 * Fact (roll of 1, 2 or 3)**: Historical question. The opponent of the player who rolled finds the question in their team's pamphlet, reads the question out loud and makes their guess. The answer key is on the last page of the document. If the player answered correctly, he/she the player adds a brick (East) or removes a brick (West) to the Wall.


 * Wildcard (roll of 6):** Details an event, disaster, or political decision that sways world public opinion. Could be positive for a player - giving him/her more bricks to add/remove, or negative - helping the opponent.


 * Scenario (roll of 4 or 5):** Outlines a historical conflict over a country between east and west. The opponent of the player who chose the card will read the scenario out loud and give the answer options. The player who selected the card will make a selection from the possible answers. Based on the response, the player can "win" up to three bricks (best response) to zero bricks (worst response) to remove/add to the wall. The ratings for the answers are written in the pamphlet with each question.

The game ends when either the wall has no more bricks (West wins) or there are no more more bricks to put on the wall (East wins); or time runs out whereupon the bricks are counted and if there are less bricks than when the game started (20), West wins; more bricks, East wins.

Motivational Issues
There are many motivational factors incorporated into the game
 * 1) The students have the chance to showcase their knowledge. The content will have been taught and the game offers chance to review before an assessment.
 * 2) The manipulatives (bricks and players) are constantly added and subtracted from the play, which gives the player a tangible goal, whether it is the stacking of the brick or the control of a country.
 * 3) The challenge comes not only from the lower level of Blooms in that the r**ecall of knowledge and facts**, but also **evaluating** various situations on the scenario cards, and finally **creating** alliances or take-overs through the use of the influence cards. The move at this point in the game could make or break the rest of the game for him or her.
 * 4) The game can fulfill a few of the needs a player must have to achieve a valuable experience playing the game. There is a team, so there is the potential for a strong sense of belonging. Not only do the members of team need to work together, but each player's victories or defeats belong to the entire team as well. Meeting a few of Maslow's Hierarchy of needs on his pyramid such as a sense of belonging and improved self-esteem can be accomplished through the player's experience.

Design Process
Our first thoughts centered around the idea that there were two opposing forces on the globe, each one trying to overcome the other. This IDEA lent itself very well to a contest/rivalry to be played out on a game board. There needed to be ways of showing which side had the advantage at any given moment, and that is where the bricks came in. They are metaphors for containment of Communism (behind the Berlin Wall) and infiltration of Democracy. The bricks represented the way in which either side could contain or infiltrate. We enhanced this idea by having a way to earn extra bricks or earn the right to take bricks off of the game board. At first, each side was to be represented by a simple flag that took up that player's side, however, the content experts thought it necessary to include a true map and eras so that the game was a supplement to learning and one that was factual. The bricks are lain across board, dividing the western half of the globe from the eastern half. The bricks are controlled by the team that can answer questions regarding Cold War facts from the given eras or presenting a plausible and highly-rated solution to a hypothetical scenario. The team considered having three decks of cards labeled Fact Cards, Scenario Cards, and Wild Cards. That interfered with the simplicity of the game, its instructions and it seemed to crowd the board as well. The solution then was to have a multi-colored die, with each color corresponding to the type of card and question the player was to answer. Our team experts contributed to the content based on tenth and eleventh grade standards. Similarities were often drawn to our game from Stratego and Risk. To play test the game, cards were cut. Then the card dossiers were printed. A smaller version of the board was printed, and paperclips were used as wall pieces. Coins were used as player markers. The whole process was quite easy. Feedback was gathered by observing players and asking them at certain points what was going well with their play and what was not. Notes were constantly taken during the entire play test.
 * Process of putting the game together**
 * Enhancements**
 * Considerations along the way**
 * Background information**
 * Feedback**

After playtesting the game, it was obvious that some changes needed to be made. The playtesters said that there needed to be more of a use for the game board itself. The playtesters said that the game board did not come in to play much, but they liked the look of the board. They were a bit confused with the scenario cards. They thought that people might get confused with the alternative history aspect. They liked the fact and wild cards, but thought the scenarios needed a "rethinking". Players liked adding and removing pieces to the Wall and thought that was fun.

As a result of the play test, we added more of a necessity to moving around the board when certain cards are drawn. We decided to keep the scenarios with the alternative history. Given the the fact that the game will be played at the end of a Cold War unit, we thought that this would be an opportunity for teachers to discuss possible outcomes of real events from the post WWII era. They scenario cards are a chance for further teacher/student interaction after the game is over.